From: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Ranjit Manomohan <ranjitm@google.com>,
Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH] sched: Buggy comparison in check_preempt_tick
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 16:26:53 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1293236813-31550-1-git-send-email-venki@google.com> (raw)
A preempt comparison line in check_preempt_tick has two bugs.
* It compares signed and unsigned quantities, which breaks when signed
quantity happens to be negative
* It compares runtime and vruntime, which breaks when there are niced tasks
The bug was initially found by linsched[1]. Change here fixes both
the problems.
On x86-64, the signed unsigned compare results in tasks running _longer_
than their expected time slice as a false resched_task() gets signalled after
4 ticks (on tick after preceding sysctl_sched_min_granularity check) and
currently running task gets picked again and runs for another ideal_slice
interval.
With 2 busy loops on a single CPU and trace_printks inside this buggy check
triggering resched task and in pick_next_task shows this:
[001] 510.524336: pick_next_task_fair: loop (5939)
[001] 510.536326: pick_next_task_fair: loop (5883)
[001] 510.540319: task_tick_fair: delta -4897059, ideal_runtime 11994146
[001] 510.540321: pick_next_task_fair: loop (5883)
[001] 510.544306: task_tick_fair: delta -906540, ideal_runtime 11994146
[001] 510.544309: pick_next_task_fair: loop (5883)
[001] 510.556306: pick_next_task_fair: loop (5939)
[001] 510.560301: task_tick_fair: delta -7105824, ideal_runtime 11994146
[001] 510.560304: pick_next_task_fair: loop (5939)
[001] 510.564298: task_tick_fair: delta -3105461, ideal_runtime 11994146
[001] 510.564300: pick_next_task_fair: loop (5939)
[001] 510.576288: pick_next_task_fair: loop (5883)
[001] 510.580282: task_tick_fair: delta -4897210, ideal_runtime 11994146
[001] 510.580285: pick_next_task_fair: loop (5883)
[001] 510.584278: task_tick_fair: delta -897348, ideal_runtime 11994146
[001] 510.584281: pick_next_task_fair: loop (5883)
[001] 510.596269: pick_next_task_fair: loop (5939)
That is 20 ms slice for each task, with some redundant resched_tasks and
with the fix it is expected ~12ms slices (on 16 cpu system).
[1] - http://lwn.net/Articles/409680/
Signed-off-by: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>
---
kernel/sched_fair.c | 4 +++-
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched_fair.c b/kernel/sched_fair.c
index 00ebd76..fc5ffbd 100644
--- a/kernel/sched_fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched_fair.c
@@ -871,8 +871,10 @@ check_preempt_tick(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *curr)
if (cfs_rq->nr_running > 1) {
struct sched_entity *se = __pick_next_entity(cfs_rq);
s64 delta = curr->vruntime - se->vruntime;
+ unsigned long ideal_vruntime;
- if (delta > ideal_runtime)
+ ideal_vruntime = calc_delta_fair(ideal_runtime, curr);
+ if (delta > (s64)ideal_vruntime)
resched_task(rq_of(cfs_rq)->curr);
}
}
--
1.7.3.1
next reply other threads:[~2010-12-25 0:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-25 0:26 Venkatesh Pallipadi [this message]
2010-12-25 7:50 ` [PATCH] sched: Buggy comparison in check_preempt_tick Mike Galbraith
2010-12-26 0:05 ` Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-12-26 7:23 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-12-28 5:48 ` Mike Galbraith
2011-01-05 4:41 ` [PATCH] " Mike Galbraith
2011-01-18 19:06 ` [tip:sched/urgent] sched: Fix signed unsigned comparison in check_preempt_tick() tip-bot for Mike Galbraith
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1293236813-31550-1-git-send-email-venki@google.com \
--to=venki@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ranjitm@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox